Barber vs. Ritter
Welcome to another edition of the Clear The Bench Colorado Friday Funnies – this week, a change of pace from the August “Dog Days of Summer” series (featuring cute & cuddly Colorado canine spokespup Nola) with a view from inside the courtroom.
Although the casual viewer may dismiss this clip as a mere farcical parody of real courtroom procedure, the judges in this sketch display about the same level of legal logic and respect for the rule of law as our own Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority” in many of their recent decisions.
How else to explain the clear violation of the Colorado Constitution’s explicitly worded prohibition of tax increases without a vote of the people in the notorious “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” case just last March, justified with ridiculous re-wording, tortured terminology and semantic shenanigans?
And just as “nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition“, nobody expected – or even much noticed, at the time - the Mullarkey Court’s “November Surprise” ruling that allowed new taxes to be re-designated as “fees” in order to bypass TABOR (and that pesky requirement to allow people to have a say in tax increases). Like the late arrival of the inquisitors in this sketch, it’s taken some time for the implications of that case to “make the scene” – but the quadrupling of the “marriage fee”, substantial increase in “vehicle registration fees” along with punitive (and unconstitutional) “late fees” due to the “FASTER” Colorado Car Tax, and of course Governor Ritter’s recent proposal to impose a new Gun Tax as part of his plan to “balance the budget” – are certainly torturing Colorado wallets.
Colorado, it’s time to get up out of the “comfy chair“ and exercise YOUR right to vote “NO” on retaining the four unjust justices of the Mullarkey Majority (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your homes and business from seizure by rapacious governments, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, not rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” Support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!), your contributions, and your “NO” vote on retaining these unjust justices in 2010!
Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold on 850 KOA’s Mike Rosen show (host: Tom Tancredo), noon 13 August (Thurs)
Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold made a special studio appearance on Thursday’s 850 KOA Mike Rosen show (hosted by Tom Tancredo).
Listen in to learn more about the grassroots movement to restore accountability to Colorado’s judiciary. The four unjust justices of the Mullarkey Majority (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) need YOUR approval to continue taking away your rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your homes and business from seizure by rapacious governments, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, not rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” Support Clear The Bench Colorado with your voice (Sound Off!), your contributions, and “NO” vote on retaining unjust justices in 2010!
Clear The Bench Colorado debuts on Television – watch Director Matt Arnold on “Independent Thinking” with Jon Caldara
Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold appeared on the Independent Thinking television program with host Jon Caldara and fellow guest John Andrews for a discussion on ”Voter Approval of Supreme Court Justices” at 8:30 last Friday on KBDI Channel 12 - a CTBC broadcast television debut. The show will be re-broadcast Tuesday, August 4th at 5PM.
For the impatient or more techno-savvy among you, the show can also be viewed (in 3 segments) on YouTube:
Watch the show Tuesday at 5PM on KBDI Channel 12, or view the video clips, to learn more about the grassroots movement to restore accountability to Colorado’s judiciary. Ditch the Mullarkey Majority (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) by voting “NO” to retain these unjust justices in 2010! Let’s Clear The Bench, Colorado!
In a little-noticed ruling issued November 3rd, 2008 (yes, great time to avoid attention, don’t you think?) the Mullarkey Majority on the Colorado Supreme Court quietly handed down an extremely far-reaching decision designed to permanently end-run TABOR and undermine the Colorado Constitution. Like most people, I missed the significance of this case (Barber vs. Ritter) both at the time (my attention, like most Americans, was focused elsewhere) and even after launching Clear The Bench Colorado.
However, recent expressions of citizens outrage in response to massive increases in vehicle registration fees and exorbitantly punitive late fees – all part of the so-called FASTER bill (SB 108) passed by the Colorado Legislature and signed into law by Governor Bill Ritter, who continues to defend the increased fees – have turned the spotlight on the issue of fees vs. taxes.
Fees vs. Taxes – what’s the difference?
A fee is a charge for use of a service or amenity – the amount of which is related to the cost of providing that service or amenity. Thus, licensing fees for hunting and fishing help fund game wardens, forestry service personnel, equipment, and property, etc. while fees for visiting state parks similarly help provide for personnel, property, upkeep, and the like. The key feature of fees is that the user of a given good or service pays, and the funds collected are related to the purpose of providing the good or service.
A tax, on the other hand, while it may be applied to a particular good or service or more generally to the population at large, is collected to raise general purpose revenues. Taxes collected may be unrelated, or completely disproportionate, to expenditures. Thus, taxes on sales of goods (alcohol, clothing, etc.) or services (restaurants, dry cleaning, etc.) are not necessarily related to the cost of providing, regulating (e.g. health & safety inspections) or protecting (police, fire, courts, etc.) the goods or services taxed. Government can spend tax revenues on anything it wants. That’s why taxes go into the “General Fund” and expenditures are allocated by the legislative budgetary process.
Back in the days when the Colorado Supreme Court apparently still believed in upholding the law instead of engaging in creative exercises of convoluted argumentation to circumvent it (Mullarkey apparently had yet to hit her stride), decisions reflected these definitions and principles. The 1989 Bloom v. City of Fort Collins decision (mangled almost beyond recognition in the Barber v. Ritter ruling) was clear:
A fee is distinct from a tax in that, “[u]nlike a tax, a special fee is not designed to raise revenues to defray the general expenses of government, but rather is a charge imposed upon persons or property for the purpose of defraying the cost of a particular governmental service.”
Morphing Taxes into Fees – the Mullarkey/Ritter shell game
Governor Ritter, the Colorado Legislature, and the Mullarkey Majority find the requirement to first ask before raising taxes (as required by TABOR) to be rather tiring – and restricting their power to accomplish their goals with your money. What to do, what to do? Simple – creatively define their way out of the restrictions; impose fees, instead of raising taxes – no need to ask the voters first; then just transfer the collected revenue (the ol’ shell game) into the general fund, so as to avoid those pesky restrictions on spending the money only on the “particular governmental service” for which the fee was collected.
But these semantic shenanigans can’t be legal, right? That’s what the plaintiffs in the Barber v. Ritter case thought – and they had good legal precedent (Bloom v. City of Fort Collins) on their side, too. However, they failed to reckon with the logic-bending and creative writing skills of the Mullarkey Court.
Starting with Bloom‘s premise that a fee “might be subject to invalidation as a tax” when the “principal purpose” is to raise general revenues, the Mullarkey Majority went on to declare that to find “principal purpose” and legislative intent, “we look to the language of the enabling statute for its expression.”
If the language discloses that the primary purpose for the charge is to finance a particular service utilized by those who must pay the charge, then the charge is a “fee.” On the other hand, if the language states that a primary purpose for the charge is to raise revenues for general governmental spending, then it is a tax. Moreover, the fact that a fee incidentally or indirectly raises revenue does not alter its essential character as a fee, transforming it into a tax. (Barber, p. 26)
Ergo, as long as legislators remember to say that a “fee” is for a particular purpose when drafting legislation, it makes no difference if in practice the “fee” is collected and spent for purposes entirely unrelated to the enabling statute. Legislators can now avoid the dreaded “ask first” TABOR restrictions on taxes by simply calling it a fee and remembering to specify a particular purpose – say, “restore crumbling bridges” – one can always shift the collected revenues to one’s pet project later.
So what’s the bottom line? Well, the good news is that thanks to the Mullarkey Majority on the Colorado Supreme Court, you probably won’t see the Colorado Legislature increase taxes much next year – as long as they haven’t completely killed TABOR, they would have to ask your permission first (well, in theory, anyway). The bad news is that thanks to the Mullarkey Court, they won’t have to raise taxes – they’ll just increase or add new “fees” instead. Now doesn’t that make you feel better?
Of course, if you’d rather not suffer an increase in either fees or taxes – at least not without being asked specifically first, as is your right under the Colorado Constitution – you have one last chance to DO something about it. Ditch the Mullarkey Majority – vote “NO” on unjust justices before they can tax you again in 2010! Let’s Clear The Bench, Colorado!